With the news of a possible LT release...I've been wandering if there's a snowball chance in hell of TT signing the guy. The answer is no, but who would you rather have in the backfield for the Packers? My answer is LT. Thoughts?
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
LT or Ryan Grant?
Collapse
X
-
Crazy as it may sound, I have to go with Grant. Not that Grant compares with LT at his best. LT though turns 30 in June and has a lot of mileage on those legs. He may have played his best football.I can't run no more with that lawless crowd
While the killers in high places say their prayers out loud
But they've summoned, they've summoned up a thundercloud
They're going to hear from me - Leonard Cohen
Comment
-
Actually they are comparable, I would much rather have Grant. If you saw LT play this year you could tell his best days are behind him. He's 30 and only going go to get worse from here.Originally posted by LEWCWAI think the only person that thinks Grant and LT are comparable is TEX and we all know how delusional he can be.
If you want to talk careers, than yes LT and Grant are not even comparable.Draft Brandin Cooks WR OSU!
Comment
-
I wouldn't bet money that Grant outplays the worn down and fading Tomlinson next season--even though I think he will, but three years, probably two years from now, hell yeah, bank on it. Grant with his much less mileage will be better.Originally posted by LEWCWAI think the only person that thinks Grant and LT are comparable is TEX and we all know how delusional he can be.
Add to that the strong probability that even in his current state of decline, Tomlinson would cost more money than Grant, and it's obvious.
The delusional people around here are the negativists that deny the reality of injuries and other bad luck being primarily responsible the ruination of last season--just like injuries ruined the 4-12 season a few years back. Delusional would be denying those.What could be more GOOD and NORMAL and AMERICAN than Packer Football?
Comment
-
Ryan Grant. LT is 30 and that is really old for a RB. I do believe his best days are behind him and that Grant is probably better or at least in the same ball park right now. So to me, you go with the young gun who can only get better instead of the old guy who will only get worse.
Oh yeah, I read the topic and was like "What?! A left tackle or a Ryan Grant?"
Comment
-
Sproles is better than LT at this point. He WAS a stud, WAS. I would not be willing to sit Grant for some 30 year old back coming off his worse season as a pro. Grant had better numbers than LT with an inferior line and will only better if we solidify our line.Originally posted by PartialLT every day of the week. You don't play for long term; you play for today. LT was banged up this year. He's still a stud imo.
They need a leader like LT.
I agree you do play for today, but you don't put Rodgers on the bench if Manning was available just because he is a little better at the present time. Just like in this example, I would not sit Grant even if LT is somewhat better at the present time. Both moves are similar and nether would make sense to me. I wouldn’t mind LT if we extremely weak at Rb and had no else to turn to. And even then I wouldn’t give much for a 30 year old back.Draft Brandin Cooks WR OSU!
Comment
-
Sproles had a big game or two this year. LT has a torn groin, thats the only reason Sproles is getting the spotlight right now.
LT is a first ballet HOF following up a legendary year with an injury plagued mediocre one. Sproles is just a guy. Nowhere near the talent of last years backup thats on the Falcons now.
I disagree with you 100%
Comment
-
Thats fine. Thats the point of a open forum. To discuss and hear others points of view.Originally posted by Partial
I disagree with you 100%
LT reminds me of Ahman Green. Old, injured, and declining. I made the mistake of wanting an old back before, but never again.Draft Brandin Cooks WR OSU!
Comment



Comment